Anyone with a bit of common sense, minimal observational skills and the ability to read soon realizes that we have an environmental crisis. However, having the ability to see and understand the signs and symptoms of a crisis doesn't mean that you will admit that there is a crisis.
There are two groups of people who will deny an environmental crisis. The first group are the leaders of denial. This group consists predominantly of super-wealthy people who own or are heavily invested in businesses that are major contributors to the problem. These people stand to lose a great deal of money if they admit that a problem, nevertheless a crisis, exists. Consequently, they deny a crisis and insist that it is merely an issue or an opinion. Also a part of this group are the politicians who belong to those super-wealthy. By "belong to" I simply mean that the super-wealthy gave them the money they needed to get elected and therefore the rich person/corporation "own" the politician. It is totally undeniable. If I give you money to act in a certain way and you don't act in the prescribed way, I'm not going to give you more money. If you feel dependent upon my money, you will act as I instruct. I own you. Since the Citizens United decision most politicians are owned. Holding a public office has become a lucrative career, as opposed to 'public service', so politicians are not going to admit that there is a crisis if it is contrary to their owner's interest. Then there are others who stand to lose significantly if they were to admit that there is a problem. To admit a problem, for them, would demand action contrary to their financial interest. Wealth is more important than life.
The second group are the followers. They tend to be uneducated which makes them an easy mark for the wealthy leaders of denial. These people may follow one of the politicians who is a denier and believe what they say, or they work in a threatened industry and believe what the owners tell them. These people tend to be gullible and easily duped. After all, anyone who would believe the biggest swam rat of them all when he said he was going to "drain the swamp" is obviously incredibly gullible.
Before I go any further I need to make it quite clear that being uneducated does not mean that I believe the uneducated person does not have any intelligence. It means that while they may have the innate intelligence to build a microchip they are incapable of building a microchip because they do not have the skills which come from education. Anti-intellectualism has been strong in the United States for a very long time. Perhaps from the beginning. I have, however, noticed during my adult lifetime that the super-wealthy, corporate CEO, et al., are quite willing to promote anti-intellectualism to further their own interests. Throughout world history you will notice that the first group a would-be dictator controls or eliminates is the educated population.
The currently most open manipulator of this anti-intellectualism is, again, the one who claimed he was going to "drain the swamp" and "make American great again". He championed the 'my ignorance is as good as your education' attitude to manipulate the uneducated. It is the same political tactic that Lyndon Johnson described when he said "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you." (Pres. Lyndon B. Johnson to staffer, Bill Moyers, the night after a Tennessee motorcade where they had encountered blatant racism.) Johnson had cut his political teeth on the manipulation of southern racism. He knew.
Looking back in history we have seen this manipulation of the uneducated every time there was a major change. When cars started replacing carriages those who had a financial interest in the horse and carriage industry convinced the gullible workers in the industry that cars were an attack on their way of life and would put them out of work. They would starve. As we all know just the opposite happened. Workers not only applied their skills to the new industry but they learned new skills and developed entire support industries with more jobs. Today solar, wind and other energy industries are growing and creating more job/career opportunities than we had actually anticipated. I don't think that proponents of solar energy anticipated the number of small solar installation shops and individuals. Just in southwestern Arizona, where millions of retired Americans winter, there is a preponderance of small solar supply and installation companies, along with individuals who will install solar on your RV. Some of these people live out in the desert and work out of their own RV.
These two group of environmental crisis deniers is, in large part, why we have a crisis. In this case they are creating and making the crisis greater by their denial because they are in political power. The super-rich one percent who own the politicians are pushing for and getting a roll back of legislation that provided some environmental protection. The politicians are getting the uneducated on board by telling them that protecting the environment is contrary to their interests. They don't realize that that is backwards. It reminds me of an old saying - 'the more things change the more they stay the same.'
Some months ago I was talking about this crisis with friends my age. Most of us had actually participated in civil rights marches or other activities. One of them commented that perhaps we need to go into the streets again, as we did in the 1960s. I voiced my opinion that that wasn't going to work this time. In the 1960s politicians still at least pretended to cared what voters thought. Political office was just beginning to turn into a college major where young people decided in their late teens that they wanted to be politicians and large corporations and their rich owners weren't allowed to buy elections. My opinion was, and continues to be, that attorneys are going to be our salvation. The only thing which makes an impression on the super-rich who control our Congress and the members of Congress themselves is to be sued. As our environmental attorneys win more and more cases, the pressure will hopefully bring about some change. Even if it doesn't bring change, the success in the courtroom may safeguard our environment or at least forestall damage until 'we the people' can actually regain control of our government.
The environment is in crisis because we can not replace wilderness and life-giving trees that are being destroyed in the name of profit and progress. The environment is in crisis because once we destroy a water source there is no going back. Once we cause the extinction of animal species that play important roles in ecological balance, there is no getting them back. We know that our technology is dependent upon nature. If we destroy nature there is no technology that can replace it. We have a crisis, not an issue.
You can stand looking at a tree and deny that it is a tree. No one can stop you, but that doesn't change the fact that it is a tree. You can stand and look at a factory destroying precious water and deny that the factory is causing irreparable damage, but that doesn't change reality. You can look at factory belching toxins into the air or a feed lot with mountains of cattle waste and deny that they are contributing to global warming and the toxification of our air, but that doesn't change reality. 2.4 billion tons of carbon dioxide goes into the atmosphere every second and if we aren't the direct contributor we are often indirect by our behavior such as cutting trees and destroying sea life as well as our over-population. You can deny that I exist, but that doesn't make me go away.
The environment is not an issue. Deny it or not, it is a crisis.
No comments:
Post a Comment